12 Cited authorities

  1. Crawford v. Roane

    53 F.3d 750 (6th Cir. 1995)   Cited 377 times
    Holding that where a participant had failed to designate a beneficiary, his children lacked standing where their only claim to benefits was an assumption that they would have been named as beneficiaries
  2. Marks v. Shell Oil Co.

    830 F.2d 68 (6th Cir. 1987)   Cited 172 times
    Reversing the grant of a motion to dismiss because the district court failed to properly consider claims alleged in a pending motion for leave to amend
  3. In re Arctic Express Inc.

    636 F.3d 781 (6th Cir. 2011)   Cited 44 times
    Noting that "common law principles apply to the formation of [Congress' numerous] statutory trusts"
  4. Anderson v. Young Touchstone Company

    735 F. Supp. 2d 831 (W.D. Tenn. 2010)   Cited 31 times

    No. 09-01176-JDB-egb. July 2, 2010. Michael J. Wall, Branstetter Stranch Jennings, PLLC, Nashville, TN, for Plaintiff. James L. Holt, Jr., Jackson Shields Yeiser Holt Speakman Lucas, Memphis, TN, for Defendant. ORDER GRANTING PLAINTIFF'S MOTION TO AMEND EDWARD G. BRYANT, United States Magistrate Judge. Before this Court is Plaintiff Ricky Anderson's Motion to Amend filed on March 23, 2010 [D.E. 18]. This motion was referred to the Magistrate Judge for determination on March 24, 2010 [D.E. 19]. Defendant

  5. Martin Marietta Corporation v. Gould, Inc.

    70 F.3d 768 (4th Cir. 1995)   Cited 49 times
    Reviewing order denying summary judgment on statute-of-limitations grounds because the district court had certified its order for appeal
  6. Parris v. Regions Bank

    No. 09-2462 (W.D. Tenn. Aug. 17, 2011)   Cited 4 times
    In Parris, a United States District Court applied Tennessee substantive law and considered the statute of limitations in Tenn.Code Ann. § 35–15–1005(a).
  7. Duncan v. Leeds

    742 F.2d 989 (6th Cir. 1984)   Cited 25 times
    Addressing the need to construe allegations of fraudulent concealment liberally and in the plaintiff's favor at such an early stage in the litigation
  8. Ladzinski v. Meba Pension Trust

    951 F. Supp. 570 (D. Md. 1997)   Cited 8 times

    Civil No. Y-96-874. January 17, 1997. Paul F. Evelius and Wright, Constable Skeen, Baltimore, MD, for Plaintiff. Marilyn L. Baker, Joseph R. House, and Mooney, Green, Baker, Gibson and Saindon, P.C., Washington, DC, for Defendants. MEMORANDUM OPINION JOSEPH H. YOUNG, Senior District Judge. This suit arises from a dispute over the amount of pension benefits Peter J. Ladzinski ("Ladzinski") is eligible to receive from the MEBA Pension Trust (the "Pension Plan"). Ladzinski filed a three count complaint

  9. Rule 12 - Defenses and Objections: When and How Presented; Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings; Consolidating Motions; Waiving Defenses; Pretrial Hearing

    Fed. R. Civ. P. 12   Cited 270,437 times   785 Legal Analyses
    Granting the court discretion to exclude matters outside the pleadings presented to the court in defense of a motion to dismiss
  10. Rule 15 - Amended and Supplemental Pleadings

    Fed. R. Civ. P. 15   Cited 71,353 times   88 Legal Analyses
    Finding that, per N.Y. C.P.L.R. § 1024, New York law provides a more forgiving principle for relation back in the context of naming John Doe defendants described with particularity in the complaint
  11. Rule 9 - Pleading Special Matters

    Fed. R. Civ. P. 9   Cited 32,159 times   261 Legal Analyses
    Requiring a party who alleged fraud or mistake to "state with particularity the circumstances constituting fraud of mistake"
  12. Section 5-101 - Three-year limitation in general

    Md. Code, Cts. & Jud. Proc. § 5-101   Cited 599 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Providing for a three-year statute of limitations based on the date a claim accrues